after triumphing over Sovietism, capitalism doesn't know how to do
anything but celebrate itself. All spheres of power and influence have been
swallowed by capitalism's pseudo-realism that asserts that any alternative is
impossible and that he only end to pursue in order to soften the inevitability
of injustice is to eke out ever more wealth.

This would-be realism is not only ominous; it is blind. Blind to the
explosive power of manifest injustice. And blind to the poisoning of the
biosphere that the increase in material wealth produces, poisoning that means
deterioration in the conditions of human life and the squandering of the
chances of generations to come.

the global oligarchy
wants to get rid of democracy and the civil rights and public liberties that
constitute its substance.

The assertion is
brutal. Let me formulate it another way: in the face of the turbulence
engendered by the global environmental and social crises, and in order to
preserve its own privileges, the oligarcy chooses to weaken the spirit and the
forms of democracy, that is to say, free discussion of collective choices;
respect for the law and its representatives; protections of individual
liberties vis-à-vis the encroachments of the state; and other constituted
entities...

The kind of oppression
that threatens democratic peoples does not in any way resemble what preceded
it... I want to imagine what aspect despotism could take on in the world: I see
an innumerable crowd of men, similar to one another and equal, who gyrate
unceasingly in order to obtain small and vulgar pleasures for themselves with
which they fill their souls. Each one of them, isolated at some remove from the
others, is like a stranger to the destiny of all the others: his children and
his personal friends constitute the entire human species for him: as for the
remainder of his fellow citizens, he is right next to them; he exists only
within and for himself, and, although he still has a family, one may at the
least say he no longer has a country. Above all these men rises an immense
tutelary power that alone assures their enjoyment and watches over their fate.
It is absolute, elaborate, regular, calculating, and mild. It would be like
paternal power, if -- like it -- its goal was to prepare men for virile
maturity; but, on the contrary, it seeks only to limit them irrevocably to
childhood; it likes its citizens to be happy, as long as they dream of nothing
other than being happy.

One cannot exclude the
possibility that some part of the oligarchy harbors an unconscious desire for
catastrophe, pursues an apotheosis of consumption that would be the consumption
of the planet Earth itself through exhaustion, through chaos, or through
nuclear war. Violence is at the heart of the process on which a consumption
society is based, Jean Baudrillard noted: 'Using objects leads only to their
slow loss. The value created by their violent loss is much more intense.'

On Sunday, the Egyptian army and police slaughtered 51 unarmed, praying protestors.

The victims were part of a crowd praying outside the Republican National Guard headquarters in Cairo, where President Morsi (assuming he is still alive) is being held.

President Morsi is the first democratically-elected head of state in Egypt's 5,000-year history. The way things are going, he could also be the last.

The army's demolition of democracy, and its massacre of peaceful, unarmed protestors, seem likely to spark a civil war in Egypt. And civil wars do not end in democracy.

Why would Egypt's fascist military leaders and the “deep state” they represent want civil war?

The Egyptian “deep state” consists of comprador billionaires and a corrupt military elite that lives on US aid. These people take orders from the global powers that be - the Bilderbergers, the Rothschilds, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission, and their bought-and-paid-for politicians.

So if Egypt's military has decided to massacre peaceful protestors at prayer, you can be sure that they are doing so as part of a larger strategy formulated by the globalists.

To understand that strategy, we must listen to the paid mouthpieces of the New World Order, and interpret their words.

Two of the New World Order's biggest megaphones are the editorialists of The Wall Street Journal, and Thomas Friedman of The New York Times.

Last Friday, The Wall Street Journal ordered Egypt's junta to follow in the footsteps of Pinochet's Chile: “Egyptians would be lucky if their new ruling generals turn out to be in the mold of Chile's Augusto Pinochet, who took over power amid chaos but hired free-market reformers and midwifed a transition to democracy.”

Pinochet was one of the worst butchers of the 20th century. After overthrowing and murdering democratically-elected President Allende in a CIA-sponsored coup on September 11th, 1971, Pinochet's goons filled football stadiums full of people, tortured them, and massacred them.

So The Wall Street Journal wants Egypt's junta to kill Morsi, just like Pinochet killed Allende, and employ widespread torture and mass murder. All in the name of “democracy.”

When the Egyptian junta decided to massacre the protestors outside Morsi's prison, they were following the orders of the New World Order oligarchy - the people who own The Wall Street Journal and dictate its output.

Why do The Wall Street Journal's owners want Egypt's junta to massacre Muslim leaders and destroy political Islam in Egypt, in the same way that the CIA's Pinochet massacred socialist leaders and destroyed socialism in Chile?

Let's ask Thomas Friedman, the New World Order's leading middlebrow mouthpiece.

In his August 2012 op-ed headlined “Morsi's Wrong Turn,” Friedman attacked Morsi for attending the non-aligned summit in Tehran: “Excuse me, President Morsi, but there is only one reason the Iranian regime wants to hold the meeting in Tehran and have heads of state like you attend, and that is to signal to Iran’s people that the world approves of their country’s clerical leadership...Morsi’s first big trip shouldn’t have been to just China and Iran.”

Friedman's diatribe was a New World Order warning to Morsi: Don't try take Egypt out of the US-Israeli orbit! Don't even think of joining the non-aligned movement! And don't ever, EVER dream of creating a “clerical dictatorship,” meaning an Islamic society!

In the same op-ed, Friedman drew a line in the sand: Morsi had better support the Syrian rebels.

Another New World Order Mouthpiece, The Washington Post, viciously attacked Morsi for questioning the official story of 9/11. In an op-ed entitled “Getting Egypt’s Morsi to give up his 9/11 ‘truther’ talk” the Post wrote:

“Morsi has not been shy about airing his odious views. In a May 2010 interview with Brookings Institution scholar Shadi Hamid, Morsi dismissed al-Qaeda’s responsibility for the attacks. 'When you come and tell me that the plane hit the tower like a knife in butter, then you are insulting us,' Hamid reported Morsi as saying. 'How did the plane cut through the steel like this? Something must have happened from the inside. It’s impossible.' Similarly, in 2007, Morsi reportedly declared that the United States “has never presented any evidences [sic] on the identity of those who committed that incident.” In 2008, he called for a 'huge scientific conference” to analyze “what caused the attack against a massive structure like the two towers.'”

Morsi, hearing so many warnings from the New World Order, apparently thought he could play both sides of the street: Defy the New World Order by working closely with Hamas and inching toward the non-aligned camp, while simultaneously taking money from the Saudis, Qataris and IMF, and offering at least verbal support to their mercenaries in Syria.

Morsi learned the hard way the truth of the old saying: “The only thing in the middle of the road is road kill.”

Now Thomas Friedman has published another New York Times op-ed laying bare the logic of the New World Order's coup d'état in Egypt. It begins:

“Watching the toppling of the Muslim Brotherhood-led government in Egypt, the most interesting question for me is this: Will we one day look back at this moment as the beginning of the rollback of political Islam?”

That is what the West's policy in the Islamic world - including the coup in Egypt - is all about: “The rollback of political Islam.”

Morsi, like the 9/11 Commission, was “set up to fail.” Now the Egyptian junta will try to do to political Islam in Egypt what Pinochet did to socialism in Chile.

But Islam is much more deeply-rooted than socialism. And no matter how hard the big Western think tanks try to dream up an apolitical Islam, no matter how many billions of dollars they throw at the problem, Islam remains “deen wa dowla” - not just a religion and a way of life, but a socio-political framework as well. And all the polls show that more than two-thirds of Muslims want a strict sharia-based society.

In Muslim-majority countries, democracy IS Islam.

If the New World Order wants to eradicate political Islam from Egypt, they cannot just kill a few tens of thousands of people like Pinochet did. They would have to massacre millions.

Not a very realistic plan.

The New World Order's plan to roll back political Islam will itself be rolled back. The sooner Muslims overcome their differences and unite, the faster it will happen.

KB/HN

Dr. Kevin Barrett, a Ph.D. Arabist-Islamologist, is one of America's best-known critics of the War on Terror. Dr. Barrett has appeared many times on Fox, CNN, PBS and other broadcast outlets, and has inspired feature stories and op-eds in the New York Times, the Christian Science Monitor, the Chicago Tribune, and other leading publications. Dr. Barrett has taught at colleges and universities in San Francisco, Paris, and Wisconsin, where he ran for Congress in 2008. He is the co-founder of the Muslim-Christian-Jewish Alliance, and author of the books Truth Jihad: My Epic Struggle Against the 9/11 Big Lie (2007) and Questioning the War on Terror: A Primer for Obama Voters (2009). His website is www.truthjihad.com. More articles by Dr. Kevin Barrett